If an 18-year-old has sex with a 17-year-old in California, it is a crime. In Georgia in 2005, a 17-year-old had oral sex with a 15-year-old and got a ten year prison sentence (http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/06/11/national/a085409D11.DTL).
There is something horribly wrong here. Part of it is just plain sexism. But I think the law really needs to be changed to allow for similarity of ages. Like if they are 2 years apart or less, it is not a crime, or only a minor misdimeanor.
What do you think?
2007-10-04 06:05:53 · 4 answers · asked by PW 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Law is not to be obeyed blindly, Mohammad
2007-10-04 06:10:28 · update #1
I am just infuriated at that judge in Georgia. My prejudice against Georgia is still well founded I see.
2007-10-04 06:12:31 · update #2
I think Oregon has a law that is in State Congress that allows a 3 year difference. That would definitely help stop wasting taxpayer money on criminalizing sex between consensual partners.
2007-10-04 06:11:11 · answer #1 · answered by that_guy 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually it is not an absolute. The police, the district attorney, and the judges have alot of leeway on it. The DA in particular. In some places the parent needs to complain, and in others the DA might choose to act on his own. Even within the same county.
It would actually be just as bad for your recommended changes to be absolutes. Its better for the courts to decide if there has been a punishable offense and how much it should be punished (the way it is now)
2007-10-07 06:06:29 · answer #2 · answered by Gandalf Parker 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Some states have an age differential clause. I n New York, we have a 5 year differential allowance.
2007-10-04 06:08:04 · answer #3 · answered by BROOOOOKLYN 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Law is to be obeyed unless repealed by subsequent law.
2007-10-04 06:08:43 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋